Improvements for M2/R2

Discussion in 'Blindsolving Discussion' started by Stefan, Oct 23, 2007.

Welcome to the Speedsolving.com. You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to join discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community of over 30,000 people, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us and we'll help you get started. We look forward to seeing you on the forums!

Already a member? Login to stop seeing this message.
  1. martijn_cube

    martijn_cube Member

    467
    0
    Feb 26, 2008
    netherlands, Lisse
    WCA:
    2007BAKK02
    YouTube:
    kadettv8
    What do you mean with that? i do not know what those numbers mean.
     
  2. tim

    tim Member

    1,691
    0
    Nov 22, 2006
    Karlsruhe, Germany
    WCA:
    2007HABE01
    YouTube:
    cin9247
    I guess he used this notation.
     
  3. blah

    blah brah

    2,143
    5
    Dec 30, 2007
    Cantucky
    WCA:
    2009LIAN03
    YouTube:
    blahcel
    Can someone translate what the purpose of this alternative notation is?
     
  4. tim

    tim Member

    1,691
    0
    Nov 22, 2006
    Karlsruhe, Germany
    WCA:
    2007HABE01
    YouTube:
    cin9247
    Thomas says, that it's easier to memorize digits (5 1728 1728 6) than letters (FRUR'U'RUR'U'F'). And he also claims that it's easier to spot inversed and mirrored algorithms with his number notation.
     
  5. Stefan

    Stefan Member

    7,287
    15
    May 7, 2006
    WCA:
    2003POCH01
    YouTube:
    StefanPochmann
  6. deadalnix

    deadalnix Member

    560
    2
    Apr 6, 2007
    WCA:
    2008SECH01
    It don't give us the alg in « standard » notation ;)
     
  7. Freddy88

    Freddy88 Member

    31
    0
    Oct 30, 2008
    Switzerland
    Hi everybody, how are you?
    Until now I always used M2/Old Pochmann. Now I would like to learn R2, but I have a couple of questions:

    1) Is there any updated list of R2 Algs, that somebody would agree to share?
    I would be very happy, 'cause I've heard there have been lots of improvements in the algs and it seems that Stefan has not updated his tutorial. For example I supposte that there are now R2 algs for orienting immediatly the R corners. Stefan, if you read this post, I would appreciate a lot If you could share with me the algs you are using now.

    2) Is it better R2, L2 or U2? I've heard there are many ways of dooing it...

    3) Is it struggling to solve corners before edges? Because I would like to use short term memory for the corners....do I need special parity algs in that way?

    Thank you in advance for your precious help,

    Best Regards,

    Federico
     
  8. Stefan

    Stefan Member

    7,287
    15
    May 7, 2006
    WCA:
    2003POCH01
    YouTube:
    StefanPochmann
    With the exception of FDL, I'm still using exactly the algs on my page. I'm no fast solver, though. Then again, I don't know of many R2 users.

    Corners before edges is somewhat unnatural. The side effect of solving the edges are only in the M slice. No corners are affected, so after solving the edges the corners are where they were in the beginning. This is not the case the other way around, as solving corners does affect edges. Though in the end that's just a problem in case of parity. If there's parity and you solve corners first, I think you can apply my parity fix after solving corners and then solve the edges, though you'd have to start edges not like usual but as if you had already solved one edge, i.e., with the edge solving side effect already in place.
     
  9. Freddy88

    Freddy88 Member

    31
    0
    Oct 30, 2008
    Switzerland
    Hi Stefan, thank's for reply.

    Mmm...it doesn't look that nice to solve corner first...
    I would be very happy if someone could tell me a solution....'cause I would like to short memorize the corners, as they are few...

    Stefan, what do you think of L2 instead of R2? Wich method has more R moves, wich is what I'm looking for....

    Regards,

    Federico
     
  10. Ellis

    Ellis Member

    1,212
    1
    Sep 23, 2008
    WCA:
    2008HALL02
    Here's something I've been messing around with the last few days. I'm probably not the first to use it, but I haven't seen it mentioned. It's a quicker way to cycle similarly oriented edges that are on opposite L and R layers. Of course you don't need to use it all the time, but if you recognize an easy case early on it can save some time.

    The algorithm I use for UL-UR is (U M' U2 M U), the inverse will of course cycle the opposite way, UR-UL (U' M' U2 M U'). My buffer is DF. If you get these specific cases you'll be saving 13 moves (best scenario), but with setup moves they can also be applied to any edges oriented like that. So if I get BL-FR for example, I do: L R (U M' U2 M U) R' L'. This shows that the maximum number of moves for similar R/L edges is 9, that is if neither of the stickers to be cycled are R/L colors.

    That same case with normal M2 would look like this: (U' L U M2 U' L' U U R U' M2 U R' U'), which is 14 moves with the cancellation. Even with the improved setup moves as shown by joel and stefan it would be 11 moves (L U M2 U R U' M2 U R' U' U' L').

    The same idea applies when you have two edges on opposite layers with both R/L stickers stickers to cycle. For that, I use (M U' M U2 M' U' M') which cycles LU-RU, and its inverse (M U M U2 M' U M'). With a maximum of 2 setup moves this means that the most moves for a pair of edges like this is 11. This can be used even in the nasty cases when the improved setup moves wont apply. Example: RB-LB, we can't cancel any setup moves in this case because doing B will move the LB edge. So for both regular M2 and M2 with improved setup moves, the total moves here is 18. It becomes 11 if you use the above algorithm: R' L (M U M U2 M' U M') L' R

    Edit- That wasn't the best example of what I was trying to say at the time. Because of the cancellations, it's faster to do it as: x' (U M U2 M' U) x

    If you really wanted to, you could use these algorithms for similar edges on the same layer. An example is RU-RF, which the setup would be (U2 R). I don't know if I really care to use something like that though, I think I'd rather keep it to opposite layers for now. Maybe I'll change my mind with more practice.

    anyway, sorry if this is too far off of the M2 topic or if it's already been discussed... it seems like this is something that might be used in another edge method (maybe it is in one that I haven't learned), but I will definitely be using these two algorithms and their inverses in my M2 solves.
     
    Last edited: Apr 26, 2009
  11. martijn_cube

    martijn_cube Member

    467
    0
    Feb 26, 2008
    netherlands, Lisse
    WCA:
    2007BAKK02
    YouTube:
    kadettv8
    Sounds like TuRBo with DF as buffer. could be nice. the Algs seem to be shorter. Turbo is with UF as buffer, and then cycle UR/ UL.
     
  12. Ellis

    Ellis Member

    1,212
    1
    Sep 23, 2008
    WCA:
    2008HALL02
    Makes sense. I've never really looked too much into TuRBo... I knew that the buffer wasn't the same but that's about it. I have this feeling that people who use M2 won't really want to do this because it's so different, but I think it can come in handy in a lot of situations.
     
  13. fanwuq

    fanwuq Member

    2,833
    2
    Dec 5, 2007
    WCA:
    2008FANW01
    YouTube:
    fanwuq
    Wow!
    Great idea! U M' U2 M U is a very useful alg. It is actually a very good replacement for the U perm in 3OP. Use DF as your buffer, setup the other 2 pieces across each other on the U layer and use this along with U2 M' U2 M and similar 4 or 5 move algs.
    As Martijn mentioned, finding a few more algs can work as TuRBo as well.
     
    Last edited: Feb 16, 2009
  14. Simboubou

    Simboubou Member

    108
    0
    Mar 25, 2008
    France
    WCA:
    2007BOUR01
    Up ! :rolleyes:

    Has anyone founded a nice way to deal with BUL/DBL/UFL/FDR corners ? Those are so slow to solve...
     
  15. Ellis

    Ellis Member

    1,212
    1
    Sep 23, 2008
    WCA:
    2008HALL02
    I hope no ones brought this up yet- I've been thinking about a different way to solve BU pairs recently (DF buffer). Just use the improved setup moves stated earlier in this thread (ie disregarding the M-slice) and then have the next position you shoot to be wherever you displaced BU to. It works both ways depending on when you do the M2 that fixes the other edge.


    Examples:

    UR - BU: U' M2 (B L' B' M2 B L B') U
    BU - LB: B' (U R' U' M2 U R U') M2 B

    Works for all pairs containing BU (+ one non m-slice edge) provided that you are displacing BU when setting up the other edge. Do M2 for the other edge before or after fixing the BU sticker depending on if BU is first or second in the pair.
     
  16. deadalnix

    deadalnix Member

    560
    2
    Apr 6, 2007
    WCA:
    2008SECH01
    Hi,

    I work on some improvement in M2 for many mounth now. Just see the dates of my firsts posts on this topic to get an idea.

    I've made so many modifications that I think we can consider my method as a new one. You can solve edge by 2 with it and with a maximum of 11 STM move for 2 edges. I haven't made the calculation including probability for an average, but I'm pretty sure it's under 10 STM. The only slice turn you need is M. The number of moves and regrips is reduced compared to M2.

    As some of you have noticed, BH seems to be great and I wonder if a kind of « super M2 » method could interest some of you ?

    I'm not a native english speaker, so making the explaination in english is a big task for me, so I want to be sure that some of you are intersted.
     
    Last edited: May 20, 2009
  17. ManuK

    ManuK Member

    99
    0
    Oct 14, 2008
    India
    I am interested..
     
  18. fanwuq

    fanwuq Member

    2,833
    2
    Dec 5, 2007
    WCA:
    2008FANW01
    YouTube:
    fanwuq
    I'm very interested if it's not too much to learn and relatively braindead when solving (easier than TuRBo?).
     
  19. Stefan

    Stefan Member

    7,287
    15
    May 7, 2006
    WCA:
    2003POCH01
    YouTube:
    StefanPochmann
    I'm interested as well. I'd suggest you just briefly outline the method and give an example solve. If we need more details to understand it, we can ask.

    Is it applicable to the 4x4 as well? Like a better r2 method?
     
  20. deadalnix

    deadalnix Member

    560
    2
    Apr 6, 2007
    WCA:
    2008SECH01
    OK, I will explain the outline.

    I have splitted the stickers into 6 groups : Uf Uo Rf Ro Lf Lo.

    The DB edge (so both stickers) is a special case. I will not explain it in the outline.

    The first letter is a face. The second letter is f for face or o for orbit.

    A face sticker is a sticker on a face, for exemple UR is an Uf sticker.
    An orbit sticker is an sticker from an edge in the face, but which is not on the face. For exemple UR is an Ro sticker.

    To make ot short, an Xf sticker is XY and an Xo sticker is YX.

    Excepted DB edge, all stickers are in the 6 groups. Some are in 2 groups, as UR. In this cas, you can consider the group you want to solve the piece.

    Then, knowing the group of the two sticker you want solve, you can apply a basic pattern. Instead of thinking set-up, you will think into adapting a pattern.

    The number of cases could seems important (6*6 groups) but in fact, Rx and Lx groups are similar.

    Most of the cases are close to M2 method (M2 is the start of my work).

    I use FD buffer, so notation could be reversed if you use DF.

    Let's see some exemples :

    For two Rf stickers. I will call J and K the standards M2 setups and j and k the simplified set-up (set up destroying the M slice). {JK} means cancellation moves.

    The pattern is jM2{J'K}M2k' . This is very close to M2. With RF RB for example, the solution is :
    RU'M2UR2U'M2UR

    With two Ro stickers, the setup will put the sticker in UF. The pattern is jM'{J'K}Mk' . This is also in the M2 spirit, but not as close as before. With FR BR, the solution is :
    RUM'U'R2UMU'R

    But for some cases, the solution isn't in the M2 spirit. For exemple, Rf Lo . In this case, you turn the cube using z' . The L sticker should be in FD or BD using D or D' as set-up. Then you can shoot your buffer intu the U face using R and the other using M. Then pattern is M'U'RUMU'R'{U'} and his F/B symmetry. (Lo Rf use the reverse pattern, obviously)

    For FL RB, the solution is :
    z'U2M'U'RUMU'R'U'z

    You have here the basic idea. Obviously, I have a pattern for each case. You can easily made the transition between M2 and this method using a kind of 2-cycle M2 like explained into macky tutorial and then, adding patterns one after another.

    This method can be applied on big cube edges (for 5x5x5). I haven't thought too much about r2 improvement, because I use BH for big cube edges and wings. I think BH is a great method, and I learning it for corners (and I use it for a long time for big cubes). But I find BH for edges not finger friendly at all, so I begin some reflection and now the results are here :D

    But I think some improvements into r2 can be found in this method. The recognition of the case if very easy on edges, but will be more difficult on wings. uRF is a Ro wing and dRF is an Rf wing. But it looks possible.

    EDIT: I have posted an example solve into a french forum : http://www.francocube.com/forum/post93907.html#p93907 I'm currently writting the french version of the tutorial, which is close to the end.
     
    Last edited: May 25, 2009

Share This Page